Summer has a bad reputation for unfairly and unrealistically demanding that women have the ‘right kind’ of body to display, but aside from blaming a season instead of the humans pushing this idea year after year, the real enemy is winter.
Call me what you will but I find it stylistically easier to take clothing off for summer than to layer it on for winter. Sweaters are cozy, but what if your under-bed storage is filled with tight-knit cropped sweaters and this year you’re into a loose-knit slouchy style? Same question for coats and boots – both of which are not cheap to replace every September.
The one winter sartorial decision that has never been anxiety-inducing are my tights. Thick, black, lined with fleece, and necessary when sans pants. How great is it to save shaving time and money while keeping relatively warm? Well…
A woman’s attitude towards tights is the ultimate personality litmus test. Views on tights indicate whether you take public transport or single-handedly keep Uber afloat; whether you’ve just had a quick break in Sicily or maxed out your holiday allowance; whether you have 100k Instagram followers or ten.
According to Ellie Pithers’ Is it Time for Tights? I am solidly poor, pale and un-Instagram popular. Now, all of those might be – are definitely – true, but why oh why do women need one. more .thing. with which to police ourselves?
Not only do we need to worry about having stylish boots with decent tread so we don’t skate gracelessly down the street, but now whether or not you put on flimsy leg coverings is the ultimate test of your personality. Makes sense; who has time for a lengthy Myers-Briggs?
Pithers declares that ‘the honeyed shin confers status faster than any Prada-tights-clad limb ever could.’ Setting aside the problematic ‘honeyed,’ we’re told that not even the most expensive tights can give you the socially desirable personality of taking Ubers and having hundreds of thousands of followers.
Side question: is being rich a personality type?
At this point I’m feeling sufficiently bad about my bank account and social standing, but thankfully I’ve not been shamed into giving up my tights.
Which is fortunate because according to the article I should only be shamed enough into buying different tights. Tights that aren’t tights because they are seamless, innovative and called ‘hosiery’; tights that aren’t tights because they’re permanently attached to shoes and called ‘thigh high boots’; and tights that aren’t tights because they’re cherry red and ‘sassy’.
How is shaming women into buying things still a viable advertising gimmick? At least we’ve moved from the explicit ‘Is your husband sleeping around? You need to shave your legs with this awesome razor!’ Instead we’re treated to a game of Is This Native Advertising? every time we try to read about style and fashion both online and in print. Progress right?
Whatever, I have to catch a bus out to the outlet mall to stock up on my favourite deniers. Winter is coming.